Editing Christadelphians (section)

==Historical antecedents==
{{See also|Baptist successionism}}
One criticism of the Christadelphian movement has been over the claim of John Thomas and Robert Roberts to have "re-discovered" scriptural truth.<ref>Christendom Astray, Robert Roberts, written 1862, Lecture 1: 'Do you mean to say, asks the incredulous enquirer, that the Bible has been studied by men of learning for eighteen centuries without being understood?  and that the thousands of ministers set apart for the very purpose of ministering in its holy pages are all mistaken?'  (He then goes on to suggest that social conditioning, self interest by the clergy and an incomplete reformation prevented its rediscovery.)</ref><ref>In an article 'A Glance at The History and Mystery of Christadelphianism', a contemporary of John Thomas, David King, from the Restoration Movement 1881, argues that a complete losing of truth would have been unlikely.  Available [http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~pdover/histmyst.htm online]</ref> However one might argue that ''all'' [[Protestant]] groups make the same claims to some extent. Although both men believed that they had "recovered" the true doctrines for themselves and contemporaries, they also believed there had always existed a group of true believers throughout the ages, albeit marred by the apostasy.<ref>'An arrangement of this sort was absolutely necessary for '''the preservation and protection of the One Body, witnessing for the truth''' against "the worshipping of the daemonials and idols", in the midst of the nations, and "before the God of the earth;" the weapons of whose warfare were civil disabilities, and the infernal tortures of anti-heretical crusaders and inquisitions.', John Thomas, 'Eureka' (1915 edition), volume 2, chapter 11, section 2.1</ref><ref>''''Thus, the history of the ages and the generations of the unmeasured Court is in strict harmony with this prophecy of the witnesses'''. For a period considerably over a thousand years after Rome renounced its old gods for the ghosts, dry bones, and fables of the catholic superstition, '''the Spirit had provided himself with Two Witnessing Classes, to whose custody he providentially committed the truth''', and its judicial vindication by fire and sword.', John Thomas, 'Eureka', volume 2, chapter 11, section 2.2</ref><ref>'Though the apostles died, their work continued, '''and the generation of believers that went to the grave with them were succeeded by other believers who maintained the integral structure of the temple of God, founded in Europe'''. True, the work was marred and corrupted by the apostasy of the mass: '''still, a real work—a real temple, existed, consisting of the remnant of true believers preserved by God as His witnesses in the midst of the prevailing corruption'''.', Robert Roberts, 'Thirteen Lectures On The Apocalypse' (4th edition 1921), page 98</ref>

The most notable Christadelphian attempts to find a continuity of those with doctrinal similarities since that point have been geographer [[Alan Eyre]]'s two books ''The Protesters''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.antipas.org/books/protesters/prot_toc.html|title=The Protesters Contents|access-date=22 January 2017|archive-date=23 September 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160923233727/http://www.antipas.org/books/protesters/prot_toc.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> (1975) and ''Brethren in Christ''<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.antipas.org/books/brethren_in_christ/binc_toc.html |title=Brethren In Christ Contents Contents |publisher=Antipas.org |date=2012-10-07 |access-date=2013-06-26 |archive-date=2012-02-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120227143407/http://www.antipas.org/books/brethren_in_christ/binc_toc.html |url-status=dead }}</ref> (1982) in which he shows that many individual Christadelphian doctrines had been previously believed. Eyre focused in particular on the [[Radical Reformation]], and also among the [[Socinians]] and other early [[Unitarianism|Unitarians]] and the [[English Dissenters]]. In this way, Eyre was able to demonstrate substantial historical precedents for individual Christadelphian teachings and practices, and believed that the Christadelphian community was the 'inheritor of a noble tradition, by which elements of the Truth were from century to century hammered out on the anvil of controversy, affliction and even anguish'.<ref name="Alan Eyre page 8">Alan Eyre, 'The Protestors', page 8 (1975)</ref> Although noting in the introduction to 'The Protestors' that 'Some recorded herein perhaps did not have "all the truth" — so the writer has been reminded',<ref name="Alan Eyre page 8"/> Eyre nevertheless claimed that the purpose of the work was to 'tell how a number of little-known individuals, groups and religious communities strove to preserve or revive the original Christianity of apostolic times',<ref>Alan Eyre, 'The Protestors', page 11 (1975)</ref> and that 'In faith and outlook they were far closer to the early springing shoots of first-century Christianity and the penetrating spiritual challenge of Jesus himself than much that has passed for the religion of the Nazarene in the last nineteen centuries'.<ref>Alan Eyre, 'The Protestors', pages 11–12 (1975)</ref>

Eyre's research has been criticized by some of his Christadelphian peers,<ref>E.g., both of Eyre's works were criticized by Ruth McHaffie 'Finding Founders and Facing Facts' (2001), in which evidence was presented suggesting that Eyre had misread a number of his sources, and that some his claims could not be supported from (and were often contradicted by) the available historical evidence. Also see James Andrews, ''Ferenc Dávid and the search for Bible truth in Transylvania''</ref> and as a result Christadelphian commentary on the subject has subsequently been more cautious and circumspect, with caveats being issued concerning Eyre's claims,<ref>'But some, though having neither time nor opportunity to search archives, knew enough to realise that the claims were exaggerated, however praiseworthy the intention. Moreover, misgivings increased as the years passed and when members examined the subject more closely for themselves. As explained in the November 1993 issue of The Endeavour Magazine, Brother Ron Coleman in 1986, when preparing an address for the Oxford ecclesia to commemorate the 450th anniversary of William Tyndale's death, not only sought information from ''The Protesters'' but also from Tyndale's own writings. He was surprised to find serious misrepresentations in our community's publication.', Ruth McHaffie, 'Finding Founders And Facing Facts' (2001), page 8</ref><ref>'In 1989 when an article by Brother Alan appeared in The Christadelphian containing a number of inaccuracies on the hymn writer Isaac Watts, editor of The Christadelphian, and subsequently corresponded with Alan in the manner which becomes Brethren.  Scholarly evidence to disprove Ron's criticisms was not forthcoming with regard to either Tyndale or Watts, and the editor was requested to publish a short note of amendment on both writers, but there appears to have been no response.', Ruth McHaffie, 'Finding Founders And Facing Facts', (2001), page 8</ref> and the two books less used and publicised than in previous years.

Nevertheless, even with most source writings of those later considered heretics destroyed, evidence can be provided that since the first century BC there have been various groups and individuals who have held certain individual Christadelphian beliefs or similar ones. For example, all the distinctive Christadelphian doctrines (with the exception of the non-literal devil),<ref name="socinian_devil">Rees, Thomas. (1818). [https://archive.org/details/racoviancatechi00reesgoog/page/n118 <!-- pg=7 quote=devil. --> The Racovian Catechism: With Notes and Illustrations, Translated from the Latin; to which is Prefixed a Sketch of the History of Unitarianism in Poland and the Adjacent Countries], p. 7.</ref> down to interpretations of specific verses, can be found particularly among sixteenth century [[Socinianism|Socinian]] writers (e.g. the rejection of the doctrines of the trinity, [[pre-existence of Christ]], immortal souls, a literal hell of fire, original sin).<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |last=Pope  |first=Hugh |title=Socinianism |year=1912 |encyclopedia=The Catholic Encyclopedia |volume=14 |location=New York |publisher=Robert Appleton Company |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14113a.htm |via=New Advent}}</ref><ref>'Socinianism' in ''Ologies & -Isms'' (The Gale Group, 2008). Available [http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Socinianism online]</ref> Early English Unitarian writings also correspond closely to those of Christadelphians.<ref>See, e.g., Joseph Cottle, ''Essays on Socinianism'' (London: Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans, 1850), [https://books.google.com/books?id=O7MHAAAAQAAJ&q=satan&pg=PA10 p. 10]; Edward Hare, ''The principal doctrines of Christianity defended against the errors of Socinianism'' (New York: T. Mason and G. Lane, 1837), [https://archive.org/details/principaldoctri01haregoog/page/n42 p. 37]</ref> Also, recent discoveries and research have shown a large similarity between Christadelphian beliefs and those held by [[Isaac Newton#Religious views|Isaac Newton]] who, among other things, rejected the doctrines of the trinity, immortal souls, a personal devil and literal demons.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Snobelen |first=Stephen D. |author-link=Stephen Snobelen |title=Isaac Newton, heretic : the strategies of a Nicodemite |journal=British Journal for the History of Science |volume=32 |pages=381–419 |year=1999 |url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/heretic.pdf |doi=10.1017/S0007087499003751 |issue=4 |s2cid=145208136 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131007005450/http://isaac-newton.org/heretic.pdf |archive-date=2013-10-07 }}</ref> Further examples are as follows:{{Original research inline|date=June 2015}}
* The typical Old Testament belief in unconsciousness until resurrection,<ref>The Christadelphian understanding of Daniel 12:2, etc.<br />{{*}}'Barr is surely right to stress that the Genesis story as it now stands indicates that humans were not created immortal, but had (and lost) the chance to gain unending life.', Wright, 'The Resurrection of the Son of God', p. 92 (2003); Wright himself actually interprets some passages of Scripture as indicating alternative beliefs, 'The Bible offers a spectrum of belief about life after death', Wright, 'The Resurrection of the Son of God', p. 129 (2003)<br />{{*}}'In contrast to the two enigmatic references to Enoch and Elijah, there are ample references to the fact that death is the ultimate destiny for all human beings, that God has no contact with or power over the dead, and that the dead do not have any relationship with God (see, inter alia, Ps. 6:6, 30:9–10, 39:13–14, 49:6–13, 115:16–18, 146:2–4). If there is a conceivable setting for the introduction of a doctrine of the afterlife, it would be in Job, since Job, although righteous, is harmed by God in the present life. But Job 10:20–22 and 14:1–10 affirm the opposite.', Gillman, 'Death and Afterlife, Judaic Doctrines Of', in Neusner, 'The Encyclopedia of Judaism', volume 1, p. 176 (2000)<br />{{*}}' "Who knows whether the breath of human beings rises up and the breath of an animal sinks down to the earth?" (Eccles 3:21). In Qohelet's day there were perhaps people who were speculating that human beings would enjoy a positive afterlife, as animals would not. Qohelet points out that there is no evidence for this.', Goldingay, 'Old Testament Theology', volume 2, p. 644 (2006)<br />{{*}}'The life of a human being came more directly from God, and it is also evident that when someone dies, the breath (rûaḥ, e.g., Ps 104:29) or the life (nepeš, e.g., Gen 35:18) disappears and returns to the God who is rûaḥ. And whereas the living may hope that the absence of God may give way again to God's presence, the dead are forever cut off from God's presence.241 Death means an end to fellowship with God and to fellowship with other people. It means an end to the activity of God and the activity of other people. Even more obviously, it means an end to my own activity. It means an end to awareness.', Goldingay, 'Old Testament Theology', volume 2, p. 640 (2006)</ref> instead of the immortality of the soul, has been held marginally throughout the history of both Judaism and Christianity;<ref>'In the first place, there have not been a few, both in ancient and modern times, who have maintained the truth of a "Conditional Immortality".', McConnell, 'The Evolution of Immortality', p. 84 (1901).<br />{{*}}'At the same time there have always been isolated voices raised in support of other views. There are hints of a belief in repentance after death, as well as conditional immortality and annihilationism.', Streeter, et al., 'Immortality: An Essay in Discovery, Co-Ordinating Scientific, Psychical, and Biblical Research', p. 204 (1917)<br />{{*}}'Many biblical scholars down throughout history, looking at the issue through Hebrew rather than Greek eyes, have denied the teaching of innate immortality.', Knight, 'A brief history of Seventh-Day Adventists', p. 42 (1999)<br />{{*}}'Various concepts of conditional immortality or annihilationism have appeared earlier in Baptist history as well. Several examples illustrate this claim. General as well as particular Baptists developed versions of annihilationism or conditional immortality.', Pool, 'Against returning to Egypt: Exposing and Resisting Credalism in the Southern Baptist Convention', p. 133 (1998)</ref> such sources include certain Jewish pseudepigraphal works,<ref>'However, Strack and Billerbeck, noted authorities on Rabbinic literature, suggest that the pseudepigraphal references to eternal punishment simply denote everlasting annihilation. See Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch (Munchen: C.H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Oskar Beck, 1928), 2:1096.', Fudge, 'The Old Testament', in Fudge & Peterson, 'Two views of hell: a biblical & theological dialogue', p. 210 (2000)<br />{{*}}'Psalms of Solomon 3:11–12; Sybilline Oracles 4:175–85; 4 Ezra 7:61; Pseudo-Philo 16:3. Other presumed annihilation texts may be found in Fudge, The Fire That Consumes, 125–54', Walvoord, 'The Metaphorical View', in Crockett & Hayes (eds.), 'Four Views on Hell', p. 64 (1997).</ref> rabbinical works,<ref>'Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish as well as his colleague Rabbi Yannai, said that there is no such thing as the popular concept of a hell, gehinnom, lasting a long time, but that at the time when G'd passes out judgment the wicked will be burned', Chananel, et al., 'Hut ha-meshulash', p. 183 (2003)<br />{{*}}'Thus we have one Rabbi denying the very existence of hell. "There is no hell in the future world," says R. Simon ben Lakish.', Darmesteter, 'The Talmud', p. 52 (2007)</ref> [[Clement of Rome]],<ref>Edward Fudge, Robert A. Peterson ''Two views of hell: a biblical & theological dialogue'' p184</ref>{{Dubious|reason=This claim is highly debatable since 1 Clement 5–6 refers to martyrs having gone to a place of glory and received a noble reward. As Mutie states, "not only does the writer of 1 Clement understand death in terms of sleep, but he also, within the tradition of the Old Testament, affirms the survival of the soul beyond the physical death" (Mutie, J. (2015). Death in Second-Century Christian Thought: The Meaning of Death in Earliest Christianity. Eugene: Wipf & Stock, p. 57.) A Wikipedia article on Christadelphians is not the place to dogmatically assert a dubious interpretation of 1 Clement's anthropology.|date=June 2015}} [[Arnobius]] in the third to fourth century,<ref>'Some have believed in the annihilation of the wicked after they should have undergone just punishment proportioned to their sins. This supposition has had a considerable number of advocates. It was maintained, among others, by Arnobius, at the close of the 3rd century, by the Socini, by Dr. Hammond, and by some of the New England divines.', Alger, 'The Destiny of the Soul: A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life', p. 546 (14th ed. 1889).<br />{{*}}'The theory of annihilationism in which the wicked pass into nonexistence either at death or the resurrection was first advanced by Arnobius, a 4th-century "Christian" apologist, according to standard reference works such as Baker's Dictionary of Theology (p. 184).', Morey, 'Death and the Afterlife', p. 199 (1984)<br />{{*}}'Already in the fourth century Arnobius taught the annihilation of the wicked.', Hoekama, 'The Bible and the Future', p. 266 (1994)</ref> a succession of Arabic and Syrian Christians from the third to the eighth century<ref>'others arose in Arabia, putting forward a doctrine foreign to the truth. They said that during the present time the human soul dies and perishes with the body, but that at the time of the resurrection they will be renewed together.', Eusebius (a contemporary), 'Ecclesiastical History' (6.37.1), NPNF2 1:297<br />{{*}}'It is unclear if Arabian thnetopsychism ['soul death'] is related to the Syriac tradition of the soul's dormition [sleep] espoused by writers like Aphrahat (d. ca. 345), Ephrem (d. 373), and Narsai (d. 502), according to whom the souls of the dead are largely inert, having lapsed into a state of sleep, in which they can only dream of their future reward or punishments.', Constas, '"To Sleep, Perchance to Dream": The Middle State of Souls in Patristic and Byzantine Literature', in Talbot (ed.), 'Dunbarton Oaks Papers', No. 55, p. 110 (2001)<br />{{*}}'Gouillard notes that variations of thnetopsychism ['soul death'] and hypnopsychism ['soul sleep'] existed alongside the views of the official church until the 6th century when they were resoundingly denounced by Eustratios.', Constas, '"To Sleep, Perchance to Dream": The Middle State of Souls in Patristic and Byzantine Literature', in Talbot (ed.), 'Dunbarton Oaks Papers', No. 55, p. 111 (2001).<br />{{*}}'Thnetopsychism ['soul death'] continued to challenge the patience and ingenuity of church officials, as evidenced by writers such as John the Deacon, [[Niketas Stethatos]], Philip Monotropos (Dioptra, pp. 210, 220), and Michael Glykas, all of whom are keenly interested in the survival of consciousness and memory among the souls of the departed saints. John the Deacon, for example, attacks those who "dare to say that praying to the saints is like shouting in the ears of the deaf, as if they had drunk from the mythical waters of Oblivion" (line 174).', [[Robert Murray (priest)|Murray]], 'Symbols of church and kingdom: a study in early Syriac tradition', p. 111 (2006)<br />{{*}}'The Syriac tradition of the soul's "sleep in the dust" (Job 21:26), with its links to the Old Testament and Jewish apocalyptic, stands as a corrective to overly Hellenized views of the afterlife, and was canonized at a Nestorian synod in the 8th century (786–787) presided over by Timothy I (d. 823), who rejected anything else as blatant Origenism.', Murray, 'Symbols of church and kingdom: a study in early Syriac tradition', p. 111 (2006).<br />{{*}}'In virtually every period of Byzantine history, critical voices denied that the souls of the dead could involve themselves in the affairs of the living or intercede on their behalf in heaven. Based on a more unitive, materialist notion of the self as irreducibly embodied, some thinkers argued that the souls of the dead (sainted or otherwise) were largely inert, having lapsed into a state of cognitive oblivion and psychomotor lethargy, a condition sometimes described as a state of "sleep" in which the soul could only "dream" of its future punishment or heavenly reward. Still others argued for the outright death of the soul, which, they claimed, was mortal and perished with the body, and which would be recreated together with the body only on the day of resurrection.', Constas, '"To Sleep, Perchance to Dream": The Middle State of Souls in Patristic and Byzantine Literature', in Talbot (ed.), 'Dunbarton Oaks Papers', No. 55, p. 94 (2001)<br />{{*}}'Till the end of the sixth century and beyond, Christians in Nisibis and Constantinople, Syria and Arabia adduced Leviticus 17:11 which states that "The soul of the whole flesh is the blood" to argue that the soul after death sank into non-existence, that it lost its sensibility and stayed inert in the grave together with the body.', Samellas, 'Death in the eastern Mediterranean (50–600 AD.): the Christianization of the East: An Interpretation', Studien Und Text Zu Antike Und Christentum, pp. 55–56 (2002)</ref><ref name="Ephrem p. 279">'The doctrine of the 'sleep of the soul' after death, a Syrian tradition held in common with Ephrem, Narsai and others', Murray, 'Symbols of church and kingdom: a study in early Syriac tradition', p. 279 (2006)</ref> including [[Aphrahat]],<ref>'On the subject of the fate of souls after death. Aphrahat insists – as does Ephrem – "that as yet no one has received his reward. For the righteous have not inherited the Kingdom, nor have the wicked gone into torment" (8.22; fc. 20). At present, the dead simply "sleep" in their graves, which are collectively referred to as Sheol, or the underworld. Their capabilities for activity and experience are, apparently, almost non-existent, "for when people die, the animal spirit is buried with the body and sense is taken away from it, but the heavenly spirit they receive [i.e. the Holy Spirit, given in baptism] goes, according to its nature, to Christ" (6.14). Aphrahat, however, seems to ascribe to the dead a kind of anticipatory consciousness of their own future which is akin to dreaming in earthly sleep.', Daley, 'The hope of the early church: a handbook of patristic eschatology', p. 73 (1991)<br />{{*}}'The wicked will be sent back to Sheol, the real of Death under the world (22.17.24; cf. 6.6), where they will be punished in the measure and the way that their sins deserve – some in "outer darkness," others in unquenchable fire, others by simple exclusion from the presence of God (22.18–22).', Daley, 'The hope of the early church: a handbook of patristic eschatology', p. 73 (1991).</ref> [[Ephrem the Syrian|Ephrem]],<ref>'Ephrem, too, conceives of the time between our death and the second coming of Jesus as a "sleep," a period of inactivity in virtually every aspect of human existence. Because his anthropology is more highly developed than Aphrahat's, and because he is so insistent – in contrast to Bardaisan and other earlier, more dualistic Syriac writers – that the human person needs both body and soul to be functional, Ephrem seems to imagine that this sleep as {{sic}} deprived even of the "dreaming" Aphrahat mentions. For Ephrem, the soul without the body is "bound," "paralyzed" (CN 476.6); it is like an embryo in its mother's womb or like a blind or deaf person: "living, but deprived of word and thought" (HP 8.4–6).', Daley, 'The hope of the early church: a handbook of patristic eschatology', p. 74 (1991)<br />{{*}}'Because of his insistence on the positive role of the body in human life and its necessity for a full human existence (e.g., CN 47.4), Ephrem sees eschatological reward and punishment as delayed until the resurrection of the dead. Resurrection will begin when souls are "awakened" from their sleep by the angel's trumpet and the commanding voice of God (CN 49.16f.).', Daley, 'The hope of the early church: a handbook of patristic eschatology', p. 75 (1991)<br />{{*}}'Ephrem's picture of Gehenna is less detailed and more traditional than his picture of heaven. The damned there seem to suffer most from their awareness that they have lost all hope sharing in beauty and happiness (HP 2.3f.; 7.29).', Daley, 'The hope of the early church: a handbook of patristic eschatology', p. 76 (1991)</ref> [[Narsai]],<ref>'Following in the tradition of Ephrem and Aphrahat, as well as that of Theodore of Mopsuestia, Narsai assumes that the souls of the dead do not receive the reward or punishment for their deeds until they are reunited with their bodies in the resurrection; until then, they must all wait in Sheol, the earthly place of the dead, in a state of conscious but powerless inactivity that Narsai refers to as a "sleep."', Daley, 'The hope of the early church: a handbook of patristic eschatology', p. 174 (1991)<br />{{*}}'The Nestorian Narsai described the soul and the body as a pair of inseparable lovers who could not live the one without the other. From the moment that her lover deserted her, he recounts, nephesh lost her speech and fell into a deep slumber. In spite of this, even in this state of forced inertia, she maintained her essential characteristics: her galloping intellect, her acute judgement, the emotions that open up a view in the world. The reason that all her faculties had ceased to function is that they had no more any purpose to serve, since the body for the sake of which they operated was no longer there. Nephesh recovered her sentience and her speech at the end of time when, together with the body, she rose to give an account for her deeds. Till then she felt no pain or joy. The vague knowledge she had of what was in store for her scarcely disturbed her peaceful sleep.', Samellas, 'Death in the eastern Mediterranean (50–600 AD.): the Christianization of the East: An Interpretation', Studien Und Text Zu Antike Und Christentum, pp. 56–57 (2002)</ref> [[Isaac of Nineveh]] (d.700),<ref>'"Isaac," too, is convinced that the final reward and punishment for human deeds awaits the resurrection (e.g., Bedjan 724.4 from bottom). Then those who died in "peace and quiet" with the lord will find eternal peace (Bedjan 276.15), while sinners will be banished to a darkness far away from God (Bedjan 117f.). Gehenna, the kingdom of the demons (Bedjan 203.4 from bottom), is a place of fire, and on the day of judgment this fire will burst forth from the bodies of the damned (Bedjan 73.4.; 118.3–7). Until the resurrection, the dead must wait in Sheol, which the author seems to imagine as a collective grave (Bedjan 366.3 from bottom; 368.5; 369.4). Some passages in the corpus suggest that the dead continue to act, in Sheol, as they have during life (e.g., Bedjan 90.13; 366.10–18). Others declare that action for good or ill is no longer possible after death (e.g., Bedjan 392.4 from bottom), and even envisage Sheol, before the judgment, as a place of fire ruled over by Satan (Bedjan 93.4f.).', Daley, 'The hope of the early church: a handbook of patristic eschatology', pp. 174–175 (1991)</ref> and [[Jacob of Sarug]],<ref>'His eschatology remains within the Syriac tradition. Thus he speaks often of death in personified terms, as the captor of an enslaved human race or as an insatiable glutton; although Sheol, where the dead now exist, is a dark place of sleep. Jacob also describes the experience of death as a dangerous journey across a sea of fire.', Daley, 'The hope of the early church: a handbook of patristic eschatology', p. 175 (1991)<br />{{*}}'On the influence of hypnopsychism on the theology of Jacob of Sarug see M. D. Guinan, "Where are the dead? Purgatory and Immediate Retribution in James of Sargu," in Symposium Syriacum 1972, pp. 546–549.', Samellas, 'Death in the eastern Mediterranean (50–600 AD.): the Christianization of the East: An Interpretation', Studien Und Text Zu Antike Und Christentum, p. 56 (2002)</ref> Jewish commentators such as [[Abraham Ibn Ezra]] (1092–1167),<ref>'But Ibn Ezra held that the souls of the wicked perish with their bodies.', Davidson, 'The Doctrine of Last Things Contained in the New Testament, Compared With Notions of the Jews and the Statements of Church Creeds', p. 139 (1882)</ref> [[Maimonides]] (1135–1204),<ref>'Maimonides claims that since the greatest punishment would be to lose one's immortal soul, the souls of the wicked are destroyed along with their bodies.', Rudavsky, 'Maimonides', p. 105 (2010)</ref> and [[Joseph Albo]] (1380–1444),<ref>'Maimonides' views are reasserted by Joseph Albo (1380–1444) in his Book of Principles.', Rudavsky, 'Maimonides', p. 206 (2010)</ref> and later Christians such as [[John Wycliffe]],<ref>'During the pre-Reformation period, there seems to be some indication that both Wycliffe and Tyndale taught the doctrine of soul sleep as the answer to the Catholic teachings of purgatory and masses for the dead.', Morey, 'Death and the Afterlife', p. 200 (1984)</ref> [[Michael Sattler]],<ref>'He has written at length on psychopannychism, the doctrine of soul sleep, widely held in the sixteenth century by such diverse figures as Camillo Renato, Michael Sattler, and for a while, Martin Luther.', Williams, Petersen, & Pater (eds.), 'The contentious triangle: church, state, and university: a festschrift in Honor of Professor George Huntston Williams', Sixteenth Century Essays and Studies, volume 2, p. (1999)<br />{{*}}'It appears that Sattler came to hold the doctrine of psychopannychism, or sleep of the soul', Snyder, The life and thought of Michael Sattler', p. 130 (1984)</ref> and many [[Anabaptists]],<ref>'Many who became Anabaptists also believed that the soul is not naturally immortal but "sleeps" between death and the final resurrection. Some affirmed, further, that only the righteous would be resurrected, while the unrighteous would simply remain dead. Many denied hell. The Venice Synod affirmed soul sleep and rejected hell Snyder, The life and thought of Michael Sattler', pp. 871–72 (1984).', Finger, 'A contemporary Anabaptist theology: biblical, historical, constructive', p. 42 (2004)</ref> long before [[Martin Luther]] challenged [[Roman Catholic]] views on heaven and hell with his teaching of "[[soul sleep]]".<ref>'The belief that the soul goes to sleep at the death of the body to await eventual resurrection was held by both Martin Luther and William Tyndale', Watts, 'The Dissenters: From the Reformation to the French Revolution', p. 119 (1985)</ref>
* The Christadelphian denial of the [[pre-existence of Christ]], and interpretation of verses such as "I came down from heaven" (John 6:38) as relating to the [[Virgin birth of Jesus|virgin birth]] and Christ's mission only, are found in the teachings of: the early [[Jewish Christians]],<ref name="Hagner 2000">Hagner, "Jewish Christianity", in Martin & Davids (eds.), 'Dictionary of the later New Testament and its developments' (2000)</ref>{{Dubious|reason=It is not clear what the scope of the term 'Jewish Christians' is here. Esler reminds us that "If 'Jewish Christianity' is defined as that form of Christianity which reflects the thought-patterns and literary forms of Judaism then virtually all of early Christianity is surely included." (Esler, P.F. (2000). The Early Christian World. New York: Routledge, p. 137). Besides the imprecise language, the claim itself is dubious. For instance, Watson writes, "An early development in Christology in Jewish Christian churches was to associate Christ with God of the Old Testament. We see this development in James and Jude, both of which were probably written in the 50s CE in early Jewish Christian contexts." (Watson, D.F. (2014). 'Christology'. In C.A. Evans (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the Historical Jesus (pp. 107–114). New York: Routledge, pp. 112–113.|date=June 2015}} the [[Ebionites]],<ref>Wright, "Ebionites", in Martin & Davids (eds.), 'Dictionary of the later New Testament and its developments' (2000)</ref> the [[Nazoreans]] (or Nazarenes),<ref>'They called Jesus the Son of God (→ Christological Titles 3.3), accepted his virgin birth, but rejected his preexistence as God', Merkel, 'Nazarene', in ), Fahlbusch & Bromiley (eds.), 'Encyclopedia of Christianity', volume 3, p. 714 (1993–2003)</ref>{{Dubious|This is very debatable, since Pritz's monograph on the Nazarenes regards their Christology as orthodox. (Pritz, R. (1988). Nazarene Jewish Christianity. Leiden: Brill, p. 35 n. 8). An article on Christadelphians is not the place to assume a disputed reconstruction of early Jewish Christianity.|date=June 2015}} the Theodotians of [[Theodotus the Cobbler]] (who believed Jesus was supernaturally begotten but a man nonetheless),<ref>'He came from Byzantium to Rome under Pope *Victor (c.189–198), proclaiming that Jesus was a man who was anointed with the Holy Spirit at His baptism and thus became Christ. He was excommunicated by Victor. His disciples, who were known as 'Theodotians', included his namesake, 'Theodotus the Money-changer' (early 3rd cent.)', Cross & Livingstone (eds.), 'The Oxford dictionary of the Christian Church', p. 1614 (3rd ed. rev. 2005)</ref> [[Artemon]],<ref>'Adoptionist heretic. He is mentioned twice by *Eusebius, who says that *Paul of Samosata revived his heresy (HE 5. 28 and 7. 30. 16 f.)', Cross & Livingstone (eds.), 'The Oxford dictionary of the Christian Church', p. 113 (3rd ed. rev. 2005)</ref> [[Paul of Samosata]],<ref>'It is clear that in his Christology Paul was an *Adoptianist, holding that in the Incarnation the Word descended on and dwelt in the man Jesus, who thus became 'Son of God'.', Cross & Livingstone (eds.), 'The Oxford dictionary of the Christian Church', p. 1250 (3rd ed. rev. 2005)</ref> the [[Pseudo-Clementines]],<ref name="Hagner 2000"/> and [[Photinus]] (d.376);<ref>R.P.C. Hanson (1916–1988), [[Lightfoot Professor of Divinity]] ''The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy, 318–381'' (9780801031465): 1973 "Christ, Photinus said, did not exist before Adam, but Adam before Christ. The sayings about Christ's celestial origins do not refer to his person, but to his teaching and his character."</ref> naturally however, given that [[non-Trinitarian]] beliefs were punishable with death from the fourth century to the seventeenth{{citation needed|date=June 2015}}, it would be foolish to expect to discover any consistent line of people or groups holding such beliefs. Such attempts become possible only after the [[Protestant Reformation]]. Christadelphian Christology is found from the publication of [[Lelio Sozzini]]'s commentary on John (1561)<ref>Wulfert De Greef ''The writings of John Calvin: an introductory guide'' 2008 p253 "Lelio Sozzini's Brevis explicatio in primum Johannis caput appeared in 1561, which marked the beginning of the Socinian phase among the Italian..."</ref> through to the increasing resistance to the miraculous among English Unitarians after 1800.<ref>R. K. Webb "Miracles in English Unitarian Thought" Essay, chapter 6 in ed. Mark S. Micale, Robert L. Dietle, Peter Gay Enlightenment, passion, modernity: historical essays in European Thought and Culture 2007 p120</ref>
* Affinities with the Christadelphian concept of the devil and/or demons are found in a range of early Jewish and later Christian sources such as: [[Jonathan ben Uzziel]] (100s AD);{{citation needed|date=June 2015}} [[Joshua Ben Karha]] (135–160);{{citation needed|date=June 2015}} [[Levi ben Gershon]] (d. 1344); [[David Kimhi]] (1160); [[Saadia Gaon|Saadia ben Joseph]] (892–942); [[Shimon ben Lakish]] (230–270),<ref>The [[Baptist]] [[theologian]] [[John Gill (theologian)|John Gill]] (1697–1771) acknowledged that early Jewish teachers interpreted 'satan' as a reference to the natural inclination people have to sin, the 'evil imagination'; "...they often say, "Satan, he is the evil imagination", or corruption of nature...", Gill on 12 Corinthians 12:7 in ''An Exposition of the New Testament''</ref> [[David Joris]] (1501-1556), [[Lelio Sozzini]] (1525-1562), [[Fausto Sozzini]] (1539-1604), [[Gerrard Winstanley]] (1609-1676), [[Joseph Mede]] (1640), [[Jacob Bauthumley]] (1650), [[Thomas Hobbes]] (1651), [[Lodowick Muggleton]] (1669), Dr. [[Anthonie van Dale]] (1685),<ref>Carus P. ''History of the Devil and the Idea of Evil''</ref> [[Emanuel Swedenborg]] (1688-1772), [[Balthasar Bekker]] (1695), [[Isaac Newton]];<ref>{{Cite book |last=Snobelen |first=Stephen |chapter=Lust, Pride, and Ambition: Isaac Newton and the Devil |year=2004 |title=Newton and Newtonianism |editor-first=J.E. |editor-last=Force |editor-first2=S. |editor-last2=Hutton |publisher=Kluwer Academic Publishers |chapter-url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/pdf/Snobelen%20Newton%20on%20the%20devil%202004.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100107205928/http://www.isaac-newton.org/pdf/Snobelen%20Newton%20on%20the%20devil%202004.pdf |archive-date=2010-01-07}}</ref> [[Christian Thomasius]] (1704), [[Arthur Ashley Sykes]] (1737), [[Nathaniel Lardner]] (1742), The New-Light Quakers of Lynn and New Bedford (1800s), [[Elias Hicks]] (1748-1830), Dr. [[Richard Mead]] (1755), [[Hugh Farmer]] (at least in the account of Christ's temptation; 1761), [[William Ashdowne]] (1791),<ref>An attempt to shew that the opinion concerning the devil or satan, as a fallen angel, and that he tempts men to sin, hath no real foundation in scripture. By William Ashdowne. 1791, printed by J. Grove; and sold by Johnson, in St. Paul's Church-yard; Marsom, bookseller, Holborn; Bristow, Canterbury; and Ledger, Dover (Canterbury)</ref> [[John Simpson (Unitarian)|John Simpson]] (1804), [[John Epps]] (1842) and [[Primitive Baptist Universalists]] also known No-Hellers (1907 to present)

Organised worship in England for those whose beliefs anticipated those of Christadelphians only truly became possible in 1779 when the [[Act of Toleration 1689]] was amended to permit denial of the Trinity, and only fully when property penalties were removed in the [[Doctrine of the Trinity Act 1813]]. This is only 35 years before John Thomas' 1849 lecture tour in Britain which attracted significant support from an existing [[non-Trinitarian]] [[Adventism|Adventist]] base, particularly, initially, in Scotland where [[Arian]], [[Socinian]], and unitarian (with a small 'u' as distinct from the Unitarian Church of [[Theophilus Lindsey]]) views were prevalent.